The New Zealand government has released a revamped three strikes proposal that incorporates full court hearings and the possibility of financial penalties. A prior proposal, which would have resulted in subscriber access being terminated without court oversight, was dropped earlier this year following public protest. The new proposal is essentially a notice-and-notice system where ISPs would be required to pass along alleged infringement notices to the subscriber. After the third notice, the rights holder could seek up to $15,000 at the Copyright Tribunal for damages sustained. If the infringements continue, the rights holder could go to court to seek suspension of the subscriber account for up to six months.

The NZ government proposes to amend its copyright law to give courts the power to suspend accounts, taking into account any relevant circumstances including multiple users of a shared account, effect on business, and vulnerable account holders. The NZ Cabinet paper also notes that the government is currently negotiating ACTA and free trade agreements that could require legislative reform.

Better, but..still no requirement for the accuser to prove that they are the rights holder prior to making a notice. At least the courts have to get involved to suspend. However, a $15,000 fine should be levied by a court, not a tribunal.

Close but no cigarThis is a huge improvement over the current ACTA “we-say-you’re-guilty-so-you-are” vision, but it does not make any provision for the innocent, and also gives them “fishing-expedition” rights.

If the rights holder cannot prove their case, they should pay all costs. That would level the playing field nicely, methinks.

But I have to wonder what happens when A.C.T.A. hits? I think its better to fight now. Possibly the best thing would be to try and spread the word to the American public who are being kept as much (if not more so) in the dark as we are.

“the government is currently negotiating ACTA and free trade agreements that could require legislative reform”

I wonder if it’s “negotiating” to “force” itself to enact disconnection based on accusations. It now knows the public outrage is too great to do this on its own, but if it did so under the pretext of a so-called “free trade” agreement, it could say, “sorry we had to do this, it says so in this agreement”, while neglecting to say that its own negotiators made no attempt to argue against the proposal.